TLDR 
Is there any audible preference/difference noticeable between the two tracks in either (or both if you prefer) of the two folders marked 'Digital' and 'Analogue'. There are two MP3 files in each.
There is also a poll attached where you are allowed a single choice out of seven options. Read the choices carefully before voting. They are:
1/ I prefer Digital Recorder A
2/ I prefer Digital Recorder B
3/ I prefer Analogue Recorder A
4/ I prefer Analogue Recorder B
5/ I prefer the Digital over the Analogue
6/ I Prefer the Analogue over the Digital
7/ I can not really discern any difference
If you can not tell much difference between models but suspect you might prefer Analogue over Digital or vice versa then there are options for that in the poll.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought it might be interesting to do a comparison between two Minidisc recorders, the MDS-JE480 which was one of the last models that Sony produced, a model that was firmly in the 'budget' category. The other is an MDS-JB920 which is an older model but much more of a heavyweight and dare I say more audiophile oriented. The budget MDS-JE480 does however sport one of the last (and best) developments of the ATRAC compression system 'ATRAC3 DSDP Type S' while the MDS JB-920 uses an earlier version of ATRAC. The later ATRAC versions were needed for the inclusion of LP2 and LP4 recording modes which doubled and quadrupled recording time available per disc, a very useful feature and one the MDS-JB920 lacks.
The actual MDS-JB920 used here is one I was fortunate to obtain a few months back. It has that classic early generation quality feel to it, it's a real heavyweight and offers very high build quality throughout. Unlike the MDS-JE480 which majors on using SMD components, this one uses mostly normal sized through hole parts.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...ttle-conundrum-at-the-end-of-the-post.405949/
The MDS-JE480 I have owned from new and this picture is from the web. It is much more a lightweight budget model but it is nicely finished and very feature rich and of course having that very desirable ATRAC3 Type S encoding system.
The recordings were made as follows. A Micromega Stage 2 CD player was used as the source and this was fed optically (TOSLINK) into both players for recording. The normal analogue output of each player was then captured and recorded for the comparison. For completeness another set of files was made using the analogue inputs on the recorders which adds the recorders own A/D convertor into the chain.
(for those familiar with the Micromega it has as only a coax digital output as standard but I modified this player years ago to add a TOSLINK output as well)
The recordings were captured using Audacity on a Dell Mobile Precision Workstation and the levels have been equalised. The raw files were converted to 320kbps MP3 to allow a reasonable file size which allows them to be attached to the forum.
I have labelled the players simply as 'Player A' and 'Player B' so you do not know which is which, however to avoid possible confusion Player A in one folder is the same as Player A in the other.
There are three zipped folders attached.
The folder called 'Digital' contains the two files recorded using the TOSLINK input, one for the MDS-JE480 and one for the MDS-JB920.
The folder called 'Analogue' contains the same two recordings but these were made using the analogue inputs to the recorders and so have the recorders own A/D conversion in the chain.
The third folder called 'Micromega' contains the same test track but this is directly recorded/sampled into Audacity with no recorder in the chain. So this can be thought of as a 'reference' and was taken from the RCA outputs of the Micromega. The Micromega Stage 2 uses dual Bitstream DAC's and had a very high reputation for sound quality back in the day.
(for anyone keen eyed I have double checked the files because you will notice a difference in compressed file sizes between players A and B in each folder and how they seemingly switch positions between the two folders. Why that happens I have no idea but it comes out that way when I repeated the process as a check. The uncompressed sizes are identical between all five files)
Is there any audible preference/difference noticeable between the two tracks in either (or both if you prefer) of the two folders marked 'Digital' and 'Analogue'. There are two MP3 files in each.There is also a poll attached where you are allowed a single choice out of seven options. Read the choices carefully before voting. They are:
1/ I prefer Digital Recorder A
2/ I prefer Digital Recorder B
3/ I prefer Analogue Recorder A
4/ I prefer Analogue Recorder B
5/ I prefer the Digital over the Analogue
6/ I Prefer the Analogue over the Digital
7/ I can not really discern any difference
If you can not tell much difference between models but suspect you might prefer Analogue over Digital or vice versa then there are options for that in the poll.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought it might be interesting to do a comparison between two Minidisc recorders, the MDS-JE480 which was one of the last models that Sony produced, a model that was firmly in the 'budget' category. The other is an MDS-JB920 which is an older model but much more of a heavyweight and dare I say more audiophile oriented. The budget MDS-JE480 does however sport one of the last (and best) developments of the ATRAC compression system 'ATRAC3 DSDP Type S' while the MDS JB-920 uses an earlier version of ATRAC. The later ATRAC versions were needed for the inclusion of LP2 and LP4 recording modes which doubled and quadrupled recording time available per disc, a very useful feature and one the MDS-JB920 lacks.
The actual MDS-JB920 used here is one I was fortunate to obtain a few months back. It has that classic early generation quality feel to it, it's a real heavyweight and offers very high build quality throughout. Unlike the MDS-JE480 which majors on using SMD components, this one uses mostly normal sized through hole parts.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...ttle-conundrum-at-the-end-of-the-post.405949/
The MDS-JE480 I have owned from new and this picture is from the web. It is much more a lightweight budget model but it is nicely finished and very feature rich and of course having that very desirable ATRAC3 Type S encoding system.
The recordings were made as follows. A Micromega Stage 2 CD player was used as the source and this was fed optically (TOSLINK) into both players for recording. The normal analogue output of each player was then captured and recorded for the comparison. For completeness another set of files was made using the analogue inputs on the recorders which adds the recorders own A/D convertor into the chain.
(for those familiar with the Micromega it has as only a coax digital output as standard but I modified this player years ago to add a TOSLINK output as well)
The recordings were captured using Audacity on a Dell Mobile Precision Workstation and the levels have been equalised. The raw files were converted to 320kbps MP3 to allow a reasonable file size which allows them to be attached to the forum.
I have labelled the players simply as 'Player A' and 'Player B' so you do not know which is which, however to avoid possible confusion Player A in one folder is the same as Player A in the other.
There are three zipped folders attached.
The folder called 'Digital' contains the two files recorded using the TOSLINK input, one for the MDS-JE480 and one for the MDS-JB920.
The folder called 'Analogue' contains the same two recordings but these were made using the analogue inputs to the recorders and so have the recorders own A/D conversion in the chain.
The third folder called 'Micromega' contains the same test track but this is directly recorded/sampled into Audacity with no recorder in the chain. So this can be thought of as a 'reference' and was taken from the RCA outputs of the Micromega. The Micromega Stage 2 uses dual Bitstream DAC's and had a very high reputation for sound quality back in the day.
(for anyone keen eyed I have double checked the files because you will notice a difference in compressed file sizes between players A and B in each folder and how they seemingly switch positions between the two folders. Why that happens I have no idea but it comes out that way when I repeated the process as a check. The uncompressed sizes are identical between all five files)
Mooly,
Wondering why are you doing this? If purely for entertainment then I think you should make clear that its not intended to be taken as scientific
You may say that you think any added noise and distortion is small so it shouldn't matter, but I think you would only have evidence of that if a substantial number of people can tell them apart.
Mark
Wondering why are you doing this? If purely for entertainment then I think you should make clear that its not intended to be taken as scientific
...as obscured in the reference case by an undefined ADC, and with the recordings modified by an MP3 algorithm? Not to mention any jitter effects from SPDIF/TOSLINK. IOW, the listening comparison is biased towards there being no audible difference, approximately as if you had added some level of noise and distortion to both recordings before asking people if they sound different.
You may say that you think any added noise and distortion is small so it shouldn't matter, but I think you would only have evidence of that if a substantial number of people can tell them apart.
Mark
Last edited:
As well as the linear stages. I'd reserve judgement, hearing a difference but before separating the linear distortions, given that they're likely reversible.
It is purely for entertainment as you put it
There are no rights and wrongs. But can you tell them apart?
We have two totally different pieces of hardware using very different versions of the technology (I'm thinking the ATRAC compression as much as anything) and there is a reference file that is recorded direct without the recorders in the chain.
Nobody else? I see the files have been downloaded quite a few times but only 3 votes so far. Come on guys, there is no right or wrong here, just your impressions.
One positive thing has come out of this, a keen eared listener has identified a real audible difference in the files (and tbh not one I was expecting) and even wondered if something was amiss with the test set up. I investigated and was able to confirm this difference exists and no, it was not a problem in the setup, it was a real difference between the recorders.
Enjoy
I see the files have been downloaded quite a few times but only 3 votes so far. Come on guys, there is no right or wrong here, just your impressions. One positive thing has come out of this, a keen eared listener has identified a real audible difference in the files (and tbh not one I was expecting) and even wondered if something was amiss with the test set up. I investigated and was able to confirm this difference exists and no, it was not a problem in the setup, it was a real difference between the recorders.
Enjoy
That's great, thanks for trying them
Hopefully more will join in with these and for those not very familiar with Minidisc there is some interesting info here:
https://www.minidisc.org/faq_sec_4....ompression ratio of 4.83:1. Here is the math:
Items 3 and 4 in the above link describe a little about MD and the ATRAC system and also the bitrates which are low in the scheme of things. Compared to CD the bit rate is close to five times lower.
Hopefully more will join in with these and for those not very familiar with Minidisc there is some interesting info here:
https://www.minidisc.org/faq_sec_4....ompression ratio of 4.83:1. Here is the math:
Items 3 and 4 in the above link describe a little about MD and the ATRAC system and also the bitrates which are low in the scheme of things. Compared to CD the bit rate is close to five times lower.
Kind of related to your discussion of the under-appreciated Minidisc format, I pass on my experience.
I started making amateur recordings of musical performances (with permission) starting with a TEAC open reel deck (moved on a hand truck) using a home-made mic preamp and borrowed mics. Looking for convenience, I took a leap of faith buying a little portable Sony MDR Z50. With a 9 volt phantom power supply and 2 dollar Panasonic aspirin sized WM-60AY condenser microphone elements, the studio fit in a lunch bag. The audio quality was, to me, amazing, particularly when I could get (often by chance) optimum microphone locations. I still use this equipment for impromptu recordings.
Based on the success of the portable, I later went to a Sony MDS JB920 mini-disc home unit and a Mackie mixer and professional mics. Interestingly, when I play even those 25 year old portable recordings on the JDs 920 through a Schiit Bifrost 2 DAC, there is even a little more detail than I previously heard. And this is sound coming through the Atrac 3 compression algorithm. To a guy who for many years did not regularly play compact discs in my listening room, the mini-disc reminded me to revisit my many audio prejudices.
I started making amateur recordings of musical performances (with permission) starting with a TEAC open reel deck (moved on a hand truck) using a home-made mic preamp and borrowed mics. Looking for convenience, I took a leap of faith buying a little portable Sony MDR Z50. With a 9 volt phantom power supply and 2 dollar Panasonic aspirin sized WM-60AY condenser microphone elements, the studio fit in a lunch bag. The audio quality was, to me, amazing, particularly when I could get (often by chance) optimum microphone locations. I still use this equipment for impromptu recordings.
Based on the success of the portable, I later went to a Sony MDS JB920 mini-disc home unit and a Mackie mixer and professional mics. Interestingly, when I play even those 25 year old portable recordings on the JDs 920 through a Schiit Bifrost 2 DAC, there is even a little more detail than I previously heard. And this is sound coming through the Atrac 3 compression algorithm. To a guy who for many years did not regularly play compact discs in my listening room, the mini-disc reminded me to revisit my many audio prejudices.
My experience maybe 20-years ago with mini-disc was also quite good. There is a recording around here somewhere I made of a live show in a small club, then transferred in analog into a Lynx-2 card. It still sounds pretty good. One of the keys to getting a good recording of a rock band was to use an external bias box at +9v for the electret mics, then go into the line input of the MD recorder.
That's a good read, thanks
As a format it is brilliant and so versatile with all the editing and so on you can do such as rearranging track orders, labeling even altering the level of something that is already recorded. Nothing like it available today as a home recorder.Some great recordings have been done on quite unlikely setups over the years and they can have an immediacy and quality that often eludes studio productions.
That's great, thank you for giving them a listen
.Hmmm, that's an interesting observation. I originally equalised the levels using Audacity on the raw original files and set the peak level at -1db. For curiosity I've just loaded the files (the actual ones attached to the forum) back into Audacity to see what gain is needed to bring them them to 0db. It should be +1db... they are all close...
These are the two digital files along with the reference.
Could there perhaps be a difference in frequency/amplitude distribution that a spectrum analyser picks up on and interprets that as a higher overall level... interesting one